On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 9:49 PM, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 03:30:32PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> writes:
> > > On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 9:14 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> > >> BTW, does pg_upgrade run pg_restore in --single-transaction mode?
> > >> That would probably make synchronous_commit moot, at least for that
> > >> step.
> > > It doesn't use pg_restore at all - it uses the dump from pg_dumpall,
> > > you can't reload with pg_restore.
> > Sorry, I should've said psql --single-transaction. Although that isn't
> > going to work either given the presence of \connect commands in the
> > script. I wonder whether pg_dumpall ought to have some sort of "one
> > transaction per database please" option.
> pg_dumpall is already doing lots of gymnastics with SQL, and pg_upgrade
> splits the output file into db/user creation and object creation, so I
> am hesitant to add anything more in there.
What about running pg_dump in a loop instead of pg_dumpall?
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Bruce Momjian||Date: 2012-11-05 21:04:12|
|Subject: Re: Pg_upgrade speed for many tables|
|Previous:||From: Jeff Janes||Date: 2012-11-05 20:57:27|
|Subject: Re: RFC: Timing Events|